Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28369082›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2017

Quantifying the roles of host movement and vector dispersal in the transmission of vector-borne diseases of livestock.

Tom Sumner, Richard J Orton, Darren M Green, Rowland R Kao, Simon Gubbins

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Knowledge mapping of risk mitigation measures against vector-borne diseases.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Long-term shifts in the seasonal abundance of adultThe Journal of applied ecology · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tom SumnerThe Pirbright Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, United Kingdom.
Richard J OrtonBoyd Orr Centre for Population and Ecosystem Health, Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Darren M GreenInstitute of Aquaculture, University of Stirling, Stirling, Stirlingshire, United Kingdom.
Rowland R KaoBoyd Orr Centre for Population and Ecosystem Health, Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Simon GubbinsThe Pirbright Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0538-4173
Glasgow Centre for Population Health · GBThe Pirbright Institute · GBUniversity of Stirling · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0801822Medical Research Council MC_UU_12014/12
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role of host movement in the spread of vector-borne diseases of livestock has been little studied. Here we develop a mathematical framework that allows us to disentangle and quantify the roles of vector dispersal and livestock movement in transmission between farms. We apply this framework to outbreaks of bluetongue virus (BTV) and Schmallenberg virus (SBV) in Great Britain, both of which are spread by Culicoides biting midges and have recently emerged in northern Europe. For BTV we estimate parameters by fitting the model to outbreak data using approximate Bayesian computation, while for SBV we use previously derived estimates. We find that around 90% of transmission of BTV between farms is a result of vector dispersal, while for SBV this proportion is 98%. This difference is a consequence of higher vector competence and shorter duration of viraemia for SBV compared with BTV. For both viruses we estimate that the mean number of secondary infections per infected farm is greater than one for vector dispersal, but below one for livestock movements. Although livestock movements account for a small proportion of transmission and cannot sustain an outbreak on their own, they play an important role in establishing new foci of infection. However, the impact of restricting livestock movements on the spread of both viruses depends critically on assumptions made about the distances over which vector dispersal occurs. If vector dispersal occurs primarily at a local scale (99% of transmission occurs <25 km), movement restrictions are predicted to be effective at reducing spread, but if dispersal occurs frequently over longer distances (99% of transmission occurs <50 km) they are not.

Indexed as

Host-Pathogen InteractionsInsect VectorsLivestockModels, TheoreticalAnimalsBayes TheoremBluetongue virusCattleCattle DiseasesDisease OutbreaksRNA VirusesSheepSheep Diseases

Identifiers

PMID28369082
PMCPMC5393902
OpenAlexW2605228663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.